[core] comments on draft-silverajan-core-coap-protocol-negotiation -08

Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com> Sat, 21 April 2018 03:21 UTC

From: Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com>
To: draft-silverajan-core-coap-protocol-negotiation@ietf.org
CC: core@ietf.org
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 20:21:13 -0700
Message-ID: <002c01d3d91f$ceccd3e0$6c667ba0$@augustcellars.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Thread-Index: AdPZBWVH+JfjjCn/SQuSD23mn0RJBQ==
Content-Language: en-us
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/core/yITf0hoPFOa3PAID0wHNYsQlphY>
Subject: [core] comments on draft-silverajan-core-coap-protocol-negotiation -08
Precedence: list

I did a fast scan over this document today and have the following questions.

1.  What is the difference between doing a resource lookup via at=coap+tcp:*
as oppose to tt=tcp ?  Should they return the same result?

2.  Is the RD supposed to reject registrations with tt= in them (as any of a
group, endpoint or link attribute)?

3.  Can I have an at on a group?  Is there more than one type of multicast
protocol that is, in theory, usable?  If yes, then would it ever be used for
resolution or just returned?

4.  It does not say it, but I assume that ol and at are orthogonal.  Thus a
query on example 6.2

GET: /rd/lookup?tt=tcp

Response:
<coap+tcp://server.example.com/sensors/temp>;ct=41;rt="temperature-f";if="se
nsor";anchor="coap+tcp://server.example.com",
<coap+tcp://server.example.com/sensors/door>;ct=41;rt="door";if="sensor";anc
hor="coap+tcp://server.example.com",
<coap+tcp://server.example.com/sensors/light>;if="sensor";
ol="http://[FDFD::123]:61616";
ol="coap://server2.example.com";anchor="coap+tcp://server.example.com"



Jim

[core] comments on draft-silverajan-core-coap-pro… Jim Schaad
Re: [core] comments on draft-silverajan-core-coap… Jim Schaad